I disagree with Michael Cohen right off the bat in his lecture about Nelson Rockefeller. Nelson wasn’t a Moderate, but was a Progressive and a Progressive Republican. Progressives in the real sense might look like Moderates compared with Socialists on the Far-Left who expect the national government to do practically everything for people. And in the case of Communists, want the national government to literally do everything for everybody. Perhaps even check people’s shoes to make sure they’re tied correctly before the central government allows for people to leave their homes. And Libertarians on the Right and if you’re talking about Anarchists on the Left, who don’t want government to do anything for everybody. That government in any form is corrupt and incompetent, and a form of enslavement.

Michael Cohen made my point that Nelson was a Progressive in his own lecture when he said that Rockefeller was a doer. He believed in government and that government can create positive change and do positive things for people. What do Progressives believe? They believe that progress can be made through government action. Limited government action since Progressives aren’t Socialists or Communists, and there not even Liberals. Less ideological than Liberals and really everyone who is not a Moderate or Centrist and stress individual rights and individualism less than Liberals.

By the time 1968 comes around Richard Nixon essentially takes over the Republican Party in order to not just win the presidential election, but to serve him politically. By campaigning strongly for Congressional Republicans in 1966 and contributing to their comeback both in the House and Senate and making the GOP players in Congress again. But also by campaigning in the South that was traditionally Democrat, but Dixiecrat and even Confederate, and even religious as far as how they looked at their politics. What we today call the Christian-Right comes to the Republican Party by the late 1960s thanks to Richard Nixon and others. With Northeastern Republicans leaving the GOP except for Nelson and a few others and become Democrats. Which left Nelson Rockefeller without a major political party to run for president for.Dartmouth College: Michael A. Cohen- Nelson Rockefeller, The 1968 Election & Disappearance of Moderate Republicans

Popular posts from this blog

To be completely honest with you, Kim Cattrall is really the only reason why I watched Exception to The Rule and why I'm at best a casual fan of it. I am a big fan of Sean Young and believe she's beautiful, sexy, very adorable, and at times at least very funny as well, but I don't believe this is her best role and movie. Her part is important especially at the end where she ends up killing The Leather N Denim Assassin. ( As I call Kim Cattrall )

But this movie is really about how the Eric McCormack and Carla Rainer ( played by Kim ) interact with each other. He's married to Angela ( played by Sean Young ) and has an affair with a perspective client or friend of McCormick's boss ( played by William DeVane ) and uses that as blackmail leverage to get this young successful lawyer to pay him or. Or threatens to tell his father in law and boss ( played by William DeVane ) about their affair and he holds firm and refuses to pay her.

The first few minutes of this interview is about Donald Trump and takes place in 2015. I’m not interested in Donald Trump for this piece, but if you are then you’re welcome to watch the video.

But I am interested in Nelson Rockefeller and what was the progressive wing of the Republican Party at least from the 1950s through the 1970s and perhaps even 1980s. Nelson was a Progressive Republican along with Governor George Romney and a few Congressional Republicans like Senator Jacob Javits, Senator Charles Matthias, even President Richard Nixon and perhaps even Dwight Eisenhower when it came to economic policy and civil rights. The Republican Party use to represent the Northeast and Midwest and had a conservative-libertarian wing in the West like Senator Barry Goldwater and others. Thanks to the civil rights movement of the 1960s and the 1960s in general , you saw Southerners who were anti-civil rights and anti-desegregation…

President Woodrow Wilson, was an idealist at least in one sense. He saw a post-World War I Europe that would be liberal democratic, with free private economies, that would never want to go to war with each other, because they would never have to. The boundaries of each country would be clear and recognized and the economies would all be private and successful. And these countries would then serve as great ally to America and never need to go to war with America either. And both sides would be great trade partners as well. With expansive free trade and low tariffs.

The League of Nations like the United Nations in the 1940s and 1950s post-World War II, was seen as an organization of allies that would protect and defend democracy and freedom around the world. The 19 teens and 1920s, was pre-Cold War. Where liberal democracies like America and in Europe, were in competition with communist and authoritarian countries like Rus…

I’m a blogger because I like writing about things I’m interested in and knowledgeable about. Which shouldn’t sound surprising, but blogging provides that immediate outlet for me and other bloggers to weigh in on what they’re thinking about and what they’re interested in. To put down on paper or computer words and feelings that they may struggle to get out of their mouths on the spot. To be able think about things and then express them. That is what blogging and writing is about, at least when it comes to commentary. Writing as a reporter or biographer, is a bit different. Because it’s not so much about what the writer feels that is relevant unless they’re being asked about it. But what’s more important is what they know and how they know that based on their reporting. An opportunity for blogger commentators to get things off their chest that perhaps they’re not able to do simply by speaking to people. That is my favorite thing about blogging to be able to immediately get things off my chest that I’m thinking about.

Blogging is the perfect form of communication for me, because I’m interested in so many different things and frankly knowledgeable about them. I write mostly about current affairs. Government and politics, public policy, history, but I’m also interested in sports especially sports history, as well as movies especially classic Hollywood and entertainers. Especially entertainers who’ve been around a long time and are from classic Hollywood. Today’s Hollywood and entertainment, not so much, but that is a subject for another piece. And when you’re a blogger and you just read something that got your attention and were really interested in from either a positive or negative standpoint, or perhaps you just saw a movie or saw some story and you’re really interested in and knowledgeable about what you just saw, you can immediately weigh in on what you just saw. I mean to be a blogger all you really need is a computer and have something to say. Being able to write helps as well.

That is what blogging and writing is to me. The ability for people to write what they’re thinking and how they feel, as well as what they know. Which is the most important thing here, because even commentators need to know what they’re talking about to be successful and make a living at that. Whether they write or talk on TV or radio, or a combination of all those things. That is what I’m going to do here and if you’re someone who has multiple interests and are interested in things besides who the latest hot celebrity is and who that person is seeing and why they’re in trouble now, or what the latest new technology is, then I hope you check out this blog. Because I cover a lot of different things here and not just government and politics, but history including Hollywood history and to a certain extent what’s going on there today. And you might even see a few pieces about so -called celebrity culture, but just from a a satiric viewpoint.